View Full Version : Rubio:I will not indulge WikiLeaks & neither should you
An adult enters the room:
"As our intelligence agencies have said, these leaks are an effort by a foreign government to interfere with our electoral process and I will not indulge it,” Rubio tells ABC news.
"Further, I want to warn my fellow Republicans who may want to capitalize politically on these leaks: Today it is the Democrats (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/democratic-party.htm). Tomorrow it could be us.
"But while Trump regularly taunts the news media for not paying enough attention to the stolen emails, Rubio argues that making an issue out of the Wikileaks disclosures plays into the hands of the Russian government."I will not discuss any issue that has become public solely on the basis of Wikileaks,” Rubio tells ABC news.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-rubio-talk-wikileaks-donald-trump/story?id=42895586 (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-rubio-talk-wikileaks-donald-trump/story?id=42895586)
The Xl
10-19-2016, 08:49 AM
The public has every right to know about the corruption and potential criminality in our government. Not shocking to see a establishment hack like Rubio pushing the Russian conspiracy narrative either.
Cigar
10-19-2016, 08:51 AM
Finally ... Little Marco speaks with some intelligence ... and not Email Gossip :laugh:
Cigar
10-19-2016, 08:53 AM
The public has every right to know about the corruption and potential criminality in our government. Not shocking to see a establishment hack like Rubio pushing the Russian conspiracy narrative either.
How many time have you wrote something in an Email that was ot didn't become policy :huh:
It's a F'cking Email Folk ... it's nothing more the Water-cooler talk.
Next we're going to believe Pillow-Talk as Policy
The public has every right to know about the corruption and potential criminality in our government. Not shocking to see a establishment hack like Rubio pushing the Russian conspiracy narrative either.
A conspiracy? Oh please ... our intel people have it pegged at a certainty, which means over 90%.
They drone bad guys at 75%.
exploited
10-19-2016, 08:53 AM
The public has every right to know about the corruption and potential criminality in our government. Not shocking to see a establishment hack like Rubio pushing the Russian conspiracy narrative either.
It isn't a conspiracy at all. It has been confirmed by a half-dozen independent security firms and two national security agencies. The only people who view it as a conspiracy are desperate Trump fans.
That said, I support WikiLeaks. Government transparency is important... One way or another.
Finally ... Little Marco speaks with some intelligence ... and not Email Gossip :laugh:
But wait there's more - he told Trump to stop talking about election rigging:
Might Little Marco be growing up? :)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/marco-rubio-trump-stop-election-rigged-evidence-42883774
The Xl
10-19-2016, 08:57 AM
A conspiracy? Oh please ... our intel people have it pegged at a certainty, which means over 90%.
They drone bad guys at 75%.
It's a complete conspiracy being pushed by people who openly want war with Russia.
It isn't a conspiracy at all. It has been confirmed by a half-dozen independent security firms and two national security agencies. The only people who view it as a conspiracy are desperate Trump fans.
That said, I support WikiLeaks. Government transparency is important... One way or another.
Funny how Trumpkins pass off confirmed facts as conspiracies, yet believe every ACTUAL conspiracy theory peddled by their Donald.
It's a complete conspiracy being pushed by people who openly want war with Russia.
Dude, that's just silly.
FindersKeepers
10-19-2016, 08:59 AM
How many time have you wrote something in an Email that was ot didn't become policy :huh:
It's a F'cking Email Folk ... it's nothing more the Water-cooler talk.
Next we're going to believe Pillow-Talk as Policy
Granted, but the same can be said of old audio recordings where folks are bragging about their (supposed) sexual prowess.
We live in an age where nothing can be considered private anymore.
The Xl
10-19-2016, 09:00 AM
It isn't a conspiracy at all. It has been confirmed by a half-dozen independent security firms and two national security agencies. The only people who view it as a conspiracy are desperate Trump fans.
That said, I support WikiLeaks. Government transparency is important... One way or another.
There is zero tangible evidence linking Russia to anything. I don't care about opinion pieces from agencies with questionable at best integrity, nothing more than war propaganda.
But, of course government transparency is a good thing. The obedient sheep seem to think otherwise though.
There is zero tangible evidence linking Russia to anything. I don't care about opinion pieces from agencies with questionable at best integrity, nothing more than war propaganda.
But, of course government transparency is a good thing. The obedient sheep seem to think otherwise though.
Whatever keeps you comfortably numb ;-)
http://blog.jmbyington.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/wearing-blinders.jpg
Newpublius
10-19-2016, 09:23 AM
An adult enters the room:
"As our intelligence agencies have said, these leaks are an effort by a foreign government to interfere with our electoral process and I will not indulge it,” Rubio tells ABC news.
"Further, I want to warn my fellow Republicans who may want to capitalize politically on these leaks: Today it is the Democrats (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/democratic-party.htm). Tomorrow it could be us.
"But while Trump regularly taunts the news media for not paying enough attention to the stolen emails, Rubio argues that making an issue out of the Wikileaks disclosures plays into the hands of the Russian government."I will not discuss any issue that has become public solely on the basis of Wikileaks,” Rubio tells ABC news.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-rubio-talk-wikileaks-donald-trump/story?id=42895586 (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-rubio-talk-wikileaks-donald-trump/story?id=42895586)
Liberals will tout wikileaks as long as it suits them, and if it doesn't they'll cut off aid to Ecuador to attempt to ensure silence. Right now the government fears wikileaks will say things that could at least possibly impact the public perception of the Democratic party in a negative way.
As long as that is the case, your position on wikileaks is merely expedient.
DGUtley
10-19-2016, 09:32 AM
How many time have you wrote something in an Email that was ot didn't become policy :huh: It's a F'cking Email Folk ... it's nothing more the Water-cooler talk. Next we're going to believe Pillow-Talk as Policy
How many times has someone shot their mouth off trying to impress someone and didn't believe it and/or it wasn't true? It's F'cking b'sing folks . . . it's nothing more than storytelling. Next we're going to believe Hillary landed under fire.
stjames1_53
10-19-2016, 09:38 AM
There is zero tangible evidence linking Russia to anything. I don't care about opinion pieces from agencies with questionable at best integrity, nothing more than war propaganda.
But, of course government transparency is a good thing. The obedient sheep seem to think otherwise though.
this feed about Russia also comes from the same group who let Clinton off the hook "lil miss quid pro quo"..............FBI ring any bells?
stjames1_53
10-19-2016, 09:39 AM
How many times has someone shot their mouth off trying to impress someone and didn't believe it and/or it wasn't true? It's F'cking b'sing folks . . . it's nothing more than storytelling. Next we're going to believe Hillary landed under fire.
she didn't???
lunchtime!!!!
Newpublius
10-19-2016, 10:00 AM
I wonder what liberals here think of Bush/Blair memo?
exploited
10-19-2016, 10:12 AM
There is zero tangible evidence linking Russia to anything. I don't care about opinion pieces from agencies with questionable at best integrity, nothing more than war propaganda.
But, of course government transparency is a good thing. The obedient sheep seem to think otherwise though.
There is no smoking gun, that is for sure. The evidence we have is based on circumstantial, highly suggestive evidence, like matching SSL certificates and MAC addresses, the sophistication of the tools used, the nature of the relationship between Putin and the Russian hacking community, the motive for Putin interfering, etc. I think any person not motivated by election year stresses would reasonably conclude that Russia is involved.
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 10:16 AM
Isn't it wonderful to see the liberal hacks falling in love with Marco Rubio. Of course it won't take much from them to fall back into their default position of smearing him about buying a little ski boat or something.
this feed about Russia also comes from the same group who let Clinton off the hook "lil miss quid pro quo"..............FBI ring any bells?
FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, National Intelligence .. ALL of 'em are in on a ginormous ruse :rolleyes:
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 10:21 AM
There is zero tangible evidence linking Russia to anything. I don't care about opinion pieces from agencies with questionable at best integrity, nothing more than war propaganda.
But, of course government transparency is a good thing. The obedient sheep seem to think otherwise though.
It is kind of humorous how liberals cherry-pick what they choose to believe or disbelieve when it comes to government intelligence data. If they find certain speculations politically convenient, they view it as fact. If those speculations do not support their political agenda, it is instantly discredited.
Liberals will tout wikileaks as long as it suits them, and if it doesn't they'll cut off aid to Ecuador to attempt to ensure silence. Right now the government fears wikileaks will say things that could at least possibly impact the public perception of the Democratic party in a negative way.
As long as that is the case, your position on wikileaks is merely expedient.
Put me on the record: I will not take anything seriously from the Swedish Rapist .. no matter whom it might implicate.
Cigar
10-19-2016, 10:24 AM
Granted, but the same can be said of old audio recordings where folks are bragging about their (supposed) sexual prowess.
We live in an age where nothing can be considered private anymore.
I'm with you, there's nothing in that Audio Recording that changed the way I think of Donald Trump. We all know what type of person Donald Trump is and the recording didn't shed any new light.
I know everything I needed to know about Donald Trump back in April 2015 when made his speech after his escalator ride. Nothing has changed.
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 10:25 AM
FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, National Intelligence .. ALL of 'em are in on a ginormous ruse :rolleyes:
Have you always so willing to accept their intelligence data as credible evidence?
Cigar
10-19-2016, 10:25 AM
Isn't it wonderful to see the liberal hacks falling in love with Marco Rubio. Of course it won't take much from them to fall back into their default position of smearing him about buying a little ski boat or something.
Who said they where falling in love with him? :huh: Names please
There is no smoking gun, that is for sure. The evidence we have is based on circumstantial, highly suggestive evidence, like matching SSL certificates and MAC addresses, the sophistication of the tools used, the nature of the relationship between Putin and the Russian hacking community, the motive for Putin interfering, etc. I think any person not motivated by election year stresses would reasonably conclude that Russia is involved.
Cozy Beat/ Fancy Bear
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/31/what-we-know-about-russias-role-dnc-email-leak/
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 10:28 AM
I'm with you, there's nothing in that Audio Recording that changed the way I think of Donald Trump. We all know what type of person Donald Trump is and the recording didn't shed any new light.
I know everything I needed to know about Donald Trump back in April 2015 when made his speech after his escalator ride. Nothing has changed.
Actually, your mind was made up about Trump when he chose to run as a Republican. You loved him when he was a Democrat publicly expressing his support for Hillary. Clinton.
Have you always so willing to accept their intelligence data as credible evidence?
For the most part, yes.
They were duped by Dirty Dick Cheney who went around on an arm twisting tour and 935 lies.
They learned from that FUBAR.
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2008/01/23/5641/false-pretenses
Cletus
10-19-2016, 10:38 AM
There is no smoking gun, that is for sure. The evidence we have is based on circumstantial, highly suggestive evidence, like matching SSL certificates and MAC addresses, the sophistication of the tools used, the nature of the relationship between Putin and the Russian hacking community, the motive for Putin interfering, etc. I think any person not motivated by election year stresses would reasonably conclude that Russia is involved.
The source of the information is irrelevant if the information is accurate.
What we don't see here is the Democrats denying the content of the messages. If they are false, let them produce the originals and refute them.
Cigar
10-19-2016, 10:43 AM
Actually, your mind was made up about Trump when he chose to run as a Republican. You loved him when he was a Democrat publicly expressing his support for Hillary. Clinton.
You don't know Jack-Sh!t about me; I've always seen Donald Trump as a Clown and a Buffoon, and that was when he was a Democrat :laugh: ... you know, before The Brother took over that White House.
Want to try again sport? :wink:
exploited
10-19-2016, 10:44 AM
The source of the information is irrelevant if the information is accurate.
What we don't see here is the Democrats denying the content of the messages. If they are false, let them produce the originals and refute them.
I agree, 100%. I am thankful to see this stuff. I hope to see more of it - including emails sent by the GOP, and other institutions.
I agree, 100%. I am thankful to see this stuff. I hope to see more of it - including emails sent by the GOP, and other institutions.
Putin will never order the hacking of Republicans on any grand scale.
They are far more in line with his Fascist ideology.
Cigar
10-19-2016, 10:50 AM
I agree, 100%. I am thankful to see this stuff. I hope to see more of it - including emails sent by the GOP, and other institutions.
Like Racist Pictures of President Obama and his Family :laugh:
Cigar
10-19-2016, 10:52 AM
Putin will never order the hacking of Republicans on any grand scale.
They are far more in line with his Fascist ideology.
He's kick them to the curb when he's done using them
exploited
10-19-2016, 10:59 AM
Putin will never order the hacking of Republicans on any grand scale.
They are far more in line with his Fascist ideology.
I don't think that WikiLeaks is run by the Russians. They are just using WikiLeaks for their own agenda.
Cletus
10-19-2016, 11:00 AM
Again, I am not seeing anyone challenge the veracity of the Emails. Instead, you are throwing up a smoke screen and trying to get people to focus on the source rather than the content.
I don't think that WikiLeaks is run by the Russians. They are just using WikiLeaks for their own agenda.
Not my point - which was that The Swedish Rapist gets his marching orders from Das Poot.
ripmeister
10-19-2016, 11:08 AM
Again, I am not seeing anyone challenge the veracity of the Emails. Instead, you are throwing up a smoke screen and trying to get people to focus on the source rather than the content.
Somehow I suspect that were the Dems to release e-Mails refuting the authenticity of the Wikileaks e-mails you would say they were made up.
He's kick them to the curb when he's done using them
Of course he will - and don't be surprised after Trump loses for Republicans to return to their previous anti-Russia talking points.
At which point, they'll be targeted.
Crepitus
10-19-2016, 11:10 AM
Putin will never order the hacking of Republicans on any grand scale.
They are far more in line with his Fascist ideology.
Actually I'm sure he already has. What do you think he's keeping them in line with?
AZ Jim
10-19-2016, 11:12 AM
Granted, but the same can be said of old audio recordings where folks are bragging about their (supposed) sexual prowess.
We live in an age where nothing can be considered private anymore.There is a major difference between a home grown scandal and a "imported" document of questionable "handling" and some alteration (which the Russians have done in the past)..
Actually I'm sure he already has. What do you think he's keeping them in line with?
You sir are correct - that information hasn't been given to WikiLeaks for dissemination.
Not yet, as long as they keep talking about how wonderful Trump and Putin are Republicans will be okay.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-hack-u-s-politics-bigger-disclosed-includes-gop-n661866
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 11:17 AM
Have you always so willing to accept their intelligence data as credible evidence?
For the most part, yes.
They were duped by Dirty Dick Cheney who went around on an arm twisting tour and 935 lies.
They learned from that FUBAR.
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2008/01/23/5641/false-pretenses
As I stated. You accept the intelligence data when it supports your political agenda.
Wait a minute....... Were you one of these people who was for the war in Iraq before you were against it? There were millions of people who were screaming for Bush to go after Iraq before they started screaming their opposition.
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 11:20 AM
You don't know Jack-Sh!t about me; I've always seen Donald Trump as a Clown and a Buffoon, and that was when he was a Democrat :laugh: ... you know, before The Brother took over that White House.
Want to try again sport? :wink:
I know all about you. You are a pure partisan hack. Nothing more. Well, there is your fixation on race, but that is compatible with being a partisan Democrat.
Crepitus
10-19-2016, 11:22 AM
You sir are correct - that information hasn't been given to WikiLeaks for dissemination.
Not yet, as long as they keep talking about how wonderful Trump and Putin are Republicans will be okay.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-hack-u-s-politics-bigger-disclosed-includes-gop-n661866
More evidence that the Russians are attempting to influence our election.
As I stated. You accept the intelligence data when it supports your political agenda.
Wait a minute....... Were you one of these people who was for the war in Iraq before you were against it? There were millions of people who were screaming for Bush to go after Iraq before they started screaming their opposition.
Wrong Gomer - After Trump loses and Republicans go back to their anti-Russia talking points, he'll release the dirt he has on them for dissemination by WL.
They know he has it, and are behaving for now. If and when the dirt starts flying on Republicans - i'll ignore it too.
Putin and Assange are both dirtbags.
And no, i did a double facepalm when we attacked a country that didn't attack us.
Cletus
10-19-2016, 12:25 PM
Somehow I suspect that were the Dems to release e-Mails refuting the authenticity of the Wikileaks e-mails you would say they were made up.
What you "suspect" is of no importance. They would be easy to authenticate or refute.
So, are you going to hold the authors of the Emails responsible for their content or are you going to blow smoke around them like the other Leftists here?
This is your chance to Ranger up and show that you are better than them.
exploited
10-19-2016, 12:34 PM
Not my point - which was that The Swedish Rapist gets his marching orders from Das Poot.
I disagree. I think their interests are aligned right now. Assange has always pursued the destabilization of the establishment.
hanger4
10-19-2016, 12:46 PM
There is a major difference between a home grown scandal and a "imported" document of questionable "handling" and some alteration (which the Russians have done in the past)..
What part of, produce the original to refute the forgery, flies over your head AZ Jim ??
hanger4
10-19-2016, 12:49 PM
No one in the Democratic Party seemed terribly concerned about the ethics of publicizing the private State tax returns of a private-sector businessman. The media couldn’t talk enough about the data.
Call me when the/Dems pony up to their double standards.
exploited
10-19-2016, 12:52 PM
No one in the Democratic Party seemed terribly concerned about the ethics of publicizing the private State tax returns of a private-sector businessman. The media couldn’t talk enough about the data.
Call me when the/Dems pony up to their double standards.
I think most of the concern is that a long-time geopolitical opponent is manipulating the election by giving powerful hacking tools to private actors. I personally think that having the data is better than not, but I can also understand the seriousness of what Putin is doing.
hanger4
10-19-2016, 12:56 PM
Did anyone stop to think that Hillary's unsecured email server could be the source of whatever info might have been need to facilitate these hacks ??
ripmeister
10-19-2016, 12:58 PM
What you "suspect" is of no importance. They would be easy to authenticate or refute.
So, are you going to hold the authors of the Emails responsible for their content or are you going to blow smoke around them like the other Leftists here?
This is your chance to Ranger up and show that you are better than them.
Its hard to say. I'm an equal opportunity skeptic. I would imagine most of them are legit but I think the possibility of there being bogus ones exists as well. In the final analysis though none of them are particularly damning as far as I can tell.
zip98053
10-19-2016, 12:58 PM
It isn't a conspiracy at all. It has been confirmed by a half-dozen independent security firms and two national security agencies. The only people who view it as a conspiracy are desperate Trump fans.
That said, I support WikiLeaks. Government transparency is important... One way or another.
Not only that, but some of them have been shown to have been doctored and invented emails (i.e., they we not created by the claimed author but by some Russian trying to screw with us. Naturally, since Julian has a great hatred of American politics, he is more than happy to have WikiLeaks participate in this election tampering.
I disagree. I think their interests are aligned right now. Assange has always pursued the destabilization of the establishment.
I don't think we disagree - I misstated my position actually. Agree with your assessment of Assange.
But he's not doing the hacking in this case - the Russians are hacking who then use Assange and WL to disseminate per Putin's wishes.
He has dirt on Republicans too, but right now Trump and Trump-supporting Republicans who suddenly think Poot is a great leader now serve his best interests.
exploited
10-19-2016, 01:00 PM
Did anyone stop to think that Hillary's unsecured email server could be the source of whatever info might have been need to facilitate these hacks ??
I don't doubt it. The idea that her server wasn't hacked seems, to me, to defy logic. Her email was well-known, and her residence was well-known.
The Xl
10-19-2016, 01:01 PM
Whatever keeps you comfortably numb ;-)
http://blog.jmbyington.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/wearing-blinders.jpg
You're a willing slave. You don't want upper class corruption exposed, you blindly accept any information fed to you. You don't have a mind of your own, your a pleb who relies on the ruling class for literally everything.
ripmeister
10-19-2016, 01:01 PM
No one in the Democratic Party seemed terribly concerned about the ethics of publicizing the private State tax returns of a private-sector businessman. The media couldn’t talk enough about the data.
Call me when the/Dems pony up to their double standards.
Good point but there is a slight difference in terms of the source of the publication.
exploited
10-19-2016, 01:01 PM
I don't think we disagree - I misstated my position actually. Agree with your assessment of Assange.
But he's not doing the hacking in this case - the Russians are hacking who then use Assange and WL to disseminate per Putin's wishes.
He has dirt on Republicans too, but right now Trump and Trump-supporting Republicans who suddenly think Poot is a great leader now serve his best interests.
Agreed.
ripmeister
10-19-2016, 01:02 PM
Did anyone stop to think that Hillary's unsecured email server could be the source of whatever info might have been need to facilitate these hacks ??
Certainly a possibility I guess.
zip98053
10-19-2016, 01:03 PM
[QUOTE=hanger4;1768329]Did anyone stop to think that Hillary's unsecured email server could be the source of whatever info might have been need to facilitate these hacks ??[/QUOTE ]
A simple Google search provides sufficient seeds to mount a hack on someone like the DNC. One could waste their time speculating that the Clinton server was involved, but it really is kind of pointless.
zip98053
10-19-2016, 01:07 PM
I don't think we disagree - I misstated my position actually. Agree with your assessment of Assange.
But he's not doing the hacking in this case - the Russians are hacking who then use Assange and WL to disseminate per Putin's wishes.
He has dirt on Republicans too, but right now Trump and Trump-supporting Republicans who suddenly think Poot is a great leader now serve his best interests.
How do you know that they also have dirt on Trump? If there was proof that they had dirt on Trump but were not releasing it then that would certainly support the notion that Russia is trying to interfere in the election in Trump's favor rather than just screwing with us because they can.
How do you know that they also have dirt on Trump? If there was proof that they had dirt on Trump but were not releasing it then that would certainly support the notion that Russia is trying to interfere in the election in Trump's favor rather than just screwing with us because they can.
I don't know that they do. But i do know that Republican and RNC databases have been breached, but that none of that data has been released through WikiLeaks.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-hack-u-s-politics-bigger-disclosed-includes-gop-n661866
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 01:31 PM
And no, i did a double facepalm when we attacked a country that didn't attack us.
I don't believe you, but did you also do that double face palm when Bill Clinton initiated s war against a country which did nothing to us?
I don't believe you, but did you also do that double face palm when Bill Clinton initiated s war against a country which did nothing to us?
Yes, i support NO intervention of any country unless we are attacked first.
Thusly, the only war i've supported in the past 25 years was going into Afghanistan to wipe out AQ training camps and disrupt their enablers after 911.
Once that was done - we should have been out.
Cigar
10-19-2016, 01:38 PM
Yes, i support NO intervention of any country unless we are attacked first.
Thusly, the only war i've supported in the past 25 years was going into Afghanistan to wipe out AQ training camps and disrupt their enablers after 911.
Once that was done - we should have been out.
George Bush the 1st knew no one ever Won a War in Afghanistan
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 01:41 PM
Yes, i support NO intervention of any country unless we are attacked first.
Thusly, the only war i've supported in the past 25 years was going into Afghanistan to wipe out AQ training camps and disrupt their enablers after 911.
Once that was done - we should have been out.
I don't believe you.
George Bush the 1st knew no one ever Won a War in Afghanistan
Yep - Sadly, Idiot Son listened only to "a Higher Father".
I don't believe you.
You don't believe anything i say.
Which is your problem ... not mine
Cigar
10-19-2016, 01:45 PM
Yep - Sadly, Idiot Son listened only to "a Higher Father".
No one since Genghis Khan :laugh:
FindersKeepers
10-19-2016, 02:41 PM
There is a major difference between a home grown scandal and a "imported" document of questionable "handling" and some alteration (which the Russians have done in the past)..
Both are very likely "homegrown," since the DNC staffer, Seth Rich, was allegedly involved in the leaking of the DNC. And, someone inside Hillary's campaign is a likely stooge for the Podesta emails. If the hackers were able to get into those accounts, there's no reason they would not have hacked everyone on Podesta's email list. The Podesta stuff isn't all that exciting. It's most likely leaked -- not hacked.
Huma's account -- now that might prove interesting. LOL
It's the same thing as the leak of the Donald's audio tape.
To avoid the embarrassment of mutiny in their ranks, the Hillary campaign prefers to blame Russia. That's just too funny.
To avoid the embarrassment of mutiny in their ranks, the Hillary campaign prefers to blame Russia. That's just too funny.
And when Trump loses and his minions return Poot and Russia to their poop-list, will you say the same thing when he hands WikiLeaks dirt on them?
Doubtful .. you'll blame Russia and appropriately so.
Be careful - your refusal to acknowledge Russian involvement now will be remembered later ;-)
Cigar
10-19-2016, 02:51 PM
And when Trump loses and his minions return Poot and Russia to their poop-list, will you say the same thing when he hands WikiLeaks dirt on them?
Doubtful .. you'll blame Russia and appropriately so.
Be careful - your refusal to acknowledge Russian involvement now will be remembered later ;-)
They'll want to Nuke them
What you "suspect" is of no importance. They would be easy to authenticate or refute.
So, are you going to hold the authors of the Emails responsible for their content or are you going to blow smoke around them like the other Leftists here?
This is your chance to Ranger up and show that you are better than them.
"Ranger up"?
:rofl:
Did anyone stop to think that Hillary's unsecured email server could be the source of whatever info might have been need to facilitate these hacks ??
As the FBI clearly expressed - no evidence of such.
They got to her emails via Blumenthal, the DNC and such.
Formatting of the releases suggests those were picked up on receipt by aforementioned..
NOT originated by Clinton.
It's quite possible that Billary's home brew server was safer than those of the government.
You're a willing slave. You don't want upper class corruption exposed, you blindly accept any information fed to you. You don't have a mind of your own, your a pleb who relies on the ruling class for literally everything.
And you my friend appear susceptible to every kooky conspiracy known to man.
So which one of us is the "willing slave"?
FindersKeepers
10-19-2016, 03:01 PM
And when Trump loses and his minions return Poot and Russia to their poop-list, will you say the same thing when he hands WikiLeaks dirt on them?
Doubtful .. you'll blame Russia and appropriately so.
Be careful - your refusal to acknowledge Russian involvement now will be remembered later ;-)
Why would I acknowledge something no one has proven yet? Why would you?
You are towing the conspiracy theory line -- you are not in good company.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 56% of Likely U.S. Voters believe it’s more likely that many in the media are working to get Clinton elected president. Just 26% disagree and say it’s more likely that the Russian government is working to get Trump elected. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/october_2016/questions_russia_and_america_october_12_13_2016).)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/october_2016/most_say_media_not_russians_tilting_the_election
hanger4
10-19-2016, 03:07 PM
As the FBI clearly expressed - no evidence of such.
They got to her emails via Blumenthal, the DNC and such.
Formatting of the releases suggests those were picked up on receipt by aforementioned..
NOT originated by Clinton.
It's quite possible that Billary's home brew server was safer than those of the government.
Comey said it probably was hacked. Would you like the words posted again ??
Why would I acknowledge something no one has proven yet? Why would you?
You are towing the conspiracy theory line -- you are not in good company.
It's proven to minimally a 95% probability by four different intel agencies and countless independent cyber experts and organizations.
Your grip on a 5% doubt is tenuous at best, and shall be remembered.
NEVER question a guy like Malcolm Nance - his credentials are above reproach.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Wrightson_Nance
Go to 2 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvfi5LlEBD0
FindersKeepers
10-19-2016, 03:27 PM
It's proven to minimally a 95% probability by four different intel agencies and countless independent cyber experts and organizations.
Your grip on a 5% doubt is tenuous at best, and shall be remembered.]
You gotta quit watching MSNBC -- LOL
What you fail to realize is that Russia didn't make the comments in Podesta's emails. Podesta and buddies did.
Did you oppose Obama's attempted (but failed) influence in Israel's election? Did you oppose Obama's complicity in the ouster of a duly elected Ukrainian president -- an act which led to the Crimea seceding?
It doesn't matter WHERE the truth comes from -- as long as it is the truth.
What you're mad at Russia about is the fact that they're releasing the truth.
Fascinating.
You gotta quit watching MSNBC -- LOL
What you fail to realize is that Russia didn't make the comments in Podesta's emails. Podesta and buddies did.
Did you oppose Obama's attempted (but failed) influence in Israel's election? Did you oppose Obama's complicity in the ouster of a duly elected Ukrainian president -- an act which led to the Crimea seceding?
It doesn't matter WHERE the truth comes from -- as long as it is the truth.
What you're mad at Russia about is the fact that they're releasing the truth.
Fascinating.
I don't believe i actually just read that. OBAMA influence in Israel's election after Congressional Rs invited Neocon Netty over to speak shortly prior?
Again - I've bookmarked the conspiracy theory comments on Russian hacking from you and others.
What goes around COMES around ---> Bunker up! :)
The Xl
10-19-2016, 03:40 PM
You gotta quit watching MSNBC -- LOL
What you fail to realize is that Russia didn't make the comments in Podesta's emails. Podesta and buddies did.
Did you oppose Obama's attempted (but failed) influence in Israel's election? Did you oppose Obama's complicity in the ouster of a duly elected Ukrainian president -- an act which led to the Crimea seceding?
It doesn't matter WHERE the truth comes from -- as long as it is the truth.
What you're mad at Russia about is the fact that they're releasing the truth.
Fascinating.
They're not interested in the truth, they're mindless zombies. They want to be slaves.
Comey said it probably was hacked. Would you like the words posted again ??
Wrong - he said there was no evidence of such but it was POSSIBLE.
Go back to your chalkboard
They're not interested in the truth, they're mindless zombies. They want to be slaves.
Yeah, and we're all secretly rooting for the New World Order!
Dummy
PS: This has nothing to do with MSNBC - it's about Malcolm Nance.
Feel free to discredit his intelligence credentials, but at your own peril.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Wrightson_Nance
The Xl
10-19-2016, 04:00 PM
You want to stay willfully ignorant. You just dismiss any damning leak while talking up silly and irrelevant media driven nonsense about Trump. You openly subscribe to this Russia conspiracy. You're a slave, dude. You don't have a mind of your own. You take anything your told as gospel.
You want to stay willfully ignorant. You just dismiss any damning leak while talking up silly and irrelevant media driven nonsense about Trump. You openly subscribe to this Russia conspiracy. You're a slave, dude. You don't have a mind of your own. You take anything your told as gospel.
Bla La
GO TRUMP!! Can't hardly wait for the ensuing entertainment!
Newpublius
10-19-2016, 04:04 PM
Wrong - he said there was no evidence of such but it was POSSIBLE.
Go back to your chalkboard
And that's the problem with a private server. Of course there's no evidence, if it didn't exist, it didn't exist, and if it existed, she deleted it. You wouldn't know.
Cletus
10-19-2016, 04:06 PM
"Ranger up"?
:rofl:
I wouldn't expect you to understand it, but it is kind of like "Man up" (which you probably also don't understand), but to a much higher standard.
The opposite of "Ranger up" would be "Liberal up".
And that's the problem with a private server. Of course there's no evidence, if it didn't exist, it didn't exist, and if it existed, she deleted it. You wouldn't know.
Simplistic - sorry but no, they examined that server and found no evidence of a hack.
You can delete emails but not evidence of latter.
Newpublius
10-19-2016, 04:11 PM
Simplistic - sorry but no, they examined that server and found no evidence of a hack.
You can delete emails but not evidence of latter.
Yes, you can. I have a server Bo, you can delete anything on it. A server is just a computer. You can delete things but you can also scrub them.
My server is inactive and I still have it up at the self storage unit now but let's say I got sued and part of the discovery requested information that I knew was on that server and the discovery also made me preserve the server and to identiy it.
Now as a lawyer I would never do anything wrong ---- of course, but I can assure you nothing I turned over would hurt me anything else would be deleted. Or maybe anything usefuk gets transferred and everything else gets left behind on a machine crushed to bits in a landfill somewhere now. If not seized by warrant, by surprise, you're letting me vette what I turn over to you.
hanger4
10-19-2016, 04:37 PM
Simplistic - sorry but no, they examined that server and found no evidence of a hack.
You can delete emails but not evidence of latter.
"But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 04:41 PM
Have you always so willing to accept their intelligence data as credible evidence?
You don't believe anything i say.
Which is your problem ... not mine
There's a reason I don't believe the things you say here. They aren't believable. That's not my problem.
Common Sense
10-19-2016, 04:43 PM
Rubio is correct.
It's a shame that Republicans chose an orange buffoon over him. He would have had a much better chance at beating Hillary.
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 05:30 PM
Rubio:I will not indulge WikiLeaks & neither should you
If these leaks were implicating the Reagan or Bush administration's, the media would be reporting this non stop all day every day. They would be scouring every word of every email. It would be the most reported story in history.
Under today's political situation they trivialize it. I wonder why?
hanger4
10-19-2016, 06:15 PM
Just look at how they treated the private tax returns of a private-sector businessman.
exploited
10-19-2016, 06:23 PM
:rollseyes:
Tahuyaman
10-19-2016, 06:30 PM
Today's media is completely transparent.
The Xl
10-19-2016, 06:43 PM
The government or any member of it has no right to be corrupt. Anyone exposing said corruption is a hero. Sad time we live in when so called liberals are rooting for impunity for certain people, open corruption, etc. Absolutely no morals or character, no capacity to think on their own.
stjames1_53
10-19-2016, 06:59 PM
The government or any member of it has no right to be corrupt. Anyone exposing said corruption is a hero. Sad time we live in when so called liberals are rooting for impunity for certain people, open corruption, etc. Absolutely no morals or character, no capacity to think on their own.
................they also enjoy the drink of spoliage
FindersKeepers
10-20-2016, 02:26 AM
I don't believe i actually just read that. OBAMA influence in Israel's election after Congressional Rs invited Neocon Netty over to speak shortly prior?
Again - I've bookmarked the conspiracy theory comments on Russian hacking from you and others.
What goes around COMES around ---> Bunker up! :)
You keep saying that but I have to ask -- to what avail?
I've been very vocal about my disagreement with the US position on Russia since this Administration helped fund the ouster of a duly elected Ukrainian president, which led to the secession of the Crimea and subsequent annexation by Russia.
My opinion isn't going to change just because our nation will be so unlucky as to have Hillary at the helm. This isn't the WWII era anymore where the citizens have only the information spoon-fed them by the government. Today, the average citizen can find out what's happening on the other side of the world a few short minutes after it happens.
Your silly insinuation that "we'll all be sorry" for not towing the Obama/Hillary government line is ludicrous.
Bottom line - the leaked info -- to date -- from Wikileaks, has been legit.
It scares you -- I get that. But sweeping it under the rug doesn't mean it isn't happening.
The flag you're wrapping yourself in isn't the US flag -- it's a globalist flag.
You just don't know it yet.
FindersKeepers
10-20-2016, 02:39 AM
They're not interested in the truth, they're mindless zombies. They want to be slaves.
I agree but what an odd turnaround we're seeing.
The liberals of the 60s and 70s were all about getting the truth out no matter what. Letting the chips fall where they may.
Today's left, I surely can't call them liberals, are diametrically opposed to the ideals of that earlier generation. They swallow the government line and their goal is to increase government to such an extent that it makes every decision in their lives.
We really have to stop calling them liberals, because they are anything but. And, while they mostly fall into the "progressive" movement, that's also a bad name because what they are doing is regressive. Bo-4 here, is all whipped up to restart a Cold War, to such an extent that he's starting to "bookmark" the comments others have made here that disagree with the current Obama/Hillary line. Who does that? Why would anyone do that?
I can think of only one reason -- that person foresees a government that is so repressive that he seeks to win favor by "ratting out" those who don't tow the line. It happens in North Korea. It happened in Nazi Germany and it happened in the old Soviet Union.
In essence, what Bo is saying is...there will be a reckoning -- you will pay for your non-compliance.
Somewhere, in the depths of a fiery hell -- Stalin smiles.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 02:56 AM
"I will not discuss any issue that has become public solely on the basis of Wikileaks..."
A hush falls over the country as they eagerly await Marco Rubio to designate appropriate topics of discussion.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 02:57 AM
How many time have you wrote something in an Email that was ot didn't become policy :huh:
It's a F'cking Email Folk ... it's nothing more the Water-cooler talk.
Next we're going to believe Pillow-Talk as Policy
XL isn't part of the ruling class, so his emails are of no concern to the general public.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 02:58 AM
A conspiracy? Oh please ... our intel people have it pegged at a certainty, which means over 90%.
Kind of like the WMD "slam dunk" in Iraq?
They drone bad guys at 75%.
Using one travesty to rationalize another?
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:03 AM
It isn't a conspiracy at all. It has been confirmed by a half-dozen independent security firms and two national security agencies. The only people who view it as a conspiracy are desperate Trump fans.
That said, I support WikiLeaks. Government transparency is important... One way or another.
Yea, just like WMD in Iraq was "confirmed" by dozens of highly credentialed agencies and firms. They had no shortage of glossy articles and authoritative white papers to wave in front of our faces. And anyone who so much as questioned the establishment narrative was harangued and mocked by a legion of conformists and quislings. I'm sure it's different this time.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:08 AM
Funny how Trumpkins pass off confirmed facts as conspiracies, yet believe every ACTUAL conspiracy theory peddled by their Donald.
You just said it was at "over 90%", so it cannot be a "confirmed fact" by definition. A probability necessarily implies uncertainty.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:15 AM
There is absolutely no doubt that "liberals" and Democrats would be saying the exact opposite of what they're saying now if the shoe were on the other foot.
If Trump were the anti-Russian extremist and Clinton was the diplomatic one, and the emails being leaked were Trump's instead of Hillary's, literally every "liberal" and Democrat in this thread would telling us that we cannot simply take the national security apparatus at its word and that its proclamations were likely influenced by their anti-Russian bias.
But because the leaks are making Clinton look bad, they have turned into neo-McCarthyites who think Kremlin agents are hiding under their beds and behind their curtains.
If Hillary becomes the President, I wouldn't be surprised if Democrats create a new UnAmerican Activities Committee to investigate dissidents and other undesirables.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:23 AM
There is no smoking gun, that is for sure. The evidence we have is based on circumstantial, highly suggestive evidence, like matching SSL certificates and MAC addresses, the sophistication of the tools used, the nature of the relationship between Putin and the Russian hacking community, the motive for Putin interfering, etc. I think any person not motivated by election year stresses would reasonably conclude that Russia is involved.
Matching MAC addresses? Matched to what?
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:25 AM
Actually I'm sure he already has. What do you think he's keeping them in line with?
Keeping them in line? Congressional Republicans are some of the most anti-Russian extremists there are. They are always talking about "Russian aggression" and such nonsense.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:28 AM
Wrong Gomer - After Trump loses and Republicans go back to their anti-Russia talking points, he'll release the dirt he has on them for dissemination by WL.
They know he has it, and are behaving for now. If and when the dirt starts flying on Republicans - i'll ignore it too.
Putin and Assange are both dirtbags.
And no, i did a double facepalm when we attacked a country that didn't attack us.
Republicans have never stopped issuing anti-Russian talking points. Trump's own running mate even contradicted him in the middle of the election on Russia. Trump is one of the only Republicans who isn't an anti-Russian extremist.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 03:43 AM
The US government has been engaged in over a century of nonstop imperialism. In that time, Russia has been the biggest obstacle to their full spectrum dominance over the entire world. This anti-Russian extremism and hysteria began in earnest in 1918 when the US and UK INVADED Russia, not because Russia attacked them, but because communists overthrew Russia's monarchy and repudiated their national debt. The bankers in London and NYC were not happy about that and have had Russia in their sights ever since. Nothing has changed in almost 100 years. Americans are still brainwashed to hate Russia and suspect them of every evil. Watching millions of Americans roll over on command as the US government and corporate media instruct them to renew their mindless hatred of Russia has been absolutely astonishing. The power of propaganda simply cannot be overstated. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword.
Crepitus
10-20-2016, 07:44 AM
Keeping them in line? Congressional Republicans are some of the most anti-Russian extremists there are. They are always talking about "Russian aggression" and such nonsense.
Except for here lately...........
You just said it was at "over 90%", so it cannot be a "confirmed fact" by definition. A probability necessarily implies uncertainty.
So when all 17 intelligence agencies public and private who examined the fingerprints say it's the Russians with "a high degree of confidence" there still is uncertainty?
I can say with a high degree of confidence that i won't be struck by lightening or win the lottery today.
So i guess there is uncertainty. :rolleyes:
I wouldn't expect you to understand it, but it is kind of like "Man up" (which you probably also don't understand), but to a much higher standard.
The opposite of "Ranger up" would be "Liberal up".
Sounds like something John Wayne might have said in the 1950s.. maybe i'm not as old as you ;-)
Cletus
10-20-2016, 08:36 AM
Sounds like something John Wayne might have said in the 1950s.. maybe i'm not as old as you ;-)
The phrase "Man up" was first known to be used in the 1940s, but it didn't really become popular until this century. "Cowboy up" has seen widespread use since the 1970s although it is probably older than that. "Ranger up" is just a military (Army specific) equivalent.
I don't believe you.
whoa, that's a heartbreaker
Newpublius
10-20-2016, 08:40 AM
The US government has been engaged in over a century of nonstop imperialism. In that time, Russia has been the biggest obstacle to their full spectrum dominance over the entire world. This anti-Russian extremism and hysteria began in earnest in 1918 when the US and UK INVADED Russia, not because Russia attacked them, but because communists overthrew Russia's monarchy and repudiated their national debt. The bankers in London and NYC were not happy about that and have had Russia in their sights ever since. Nothing has changed in almost 100 years. Americans are still brainwashed to hate Russia and suspect them of every evil. Watching millions of Americans roll over on command as the US government and corporate media instruct them to renew their mindless hatred of Russia has been absolutely astonishing. The power of propaganda simply cannot be overstated. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword.
Personally I view it a little bit better than that. While I dislike being the enforcer of Pax Americana, the initial cold war has some nagural extension to WW2. Post fall of Berlin Wall thougj, pushing NATO eastward to Russia's borders is clearly provocative. We should be #outofnato, Europe is perfectly capable of defending itself. And there is no reason we can't treat with Russia and trade with them, we both have many things the other also wants.
russia just wants peace, everyone knows that.
that's why they're conducting naval exercises in the english channel- nothing says peace like migs over the orkneys.
@Bo-4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1297) here, is all whipped up to restart a Cold War, to such an extent that he's starting to "bookmark" the comments others have made here that disagree with the current Obama/Hillary line. Who does that? Why would anyone do that?
I am quite certain that after Trump loses, conservatives return to considering Putin a bad guy, not some strong leader who plays Obama like a fiddle.
You went along with this nonsense because you hate Obama FindersKeepers.
The very SECOND conservatives return to Putin bashing, he will become angry that you're no longer towing the line and will release a mountain of crap on the RNC and perhaps your next presidential candidate.
It makes you happy right now that he is meddling in our election because of the manner in which he is doing so. You'll be pointing fingers and sputtering when the tables are turned.
Your claim that it doesn't matter as long as it's the truth is shallow at best.
You wouldn't like it one bit if i hacked all your emails over the past several years and posted them here.
Stop pretending.
FindersKeepers
10-20-2016, 09:26 AM
I am quite certain that after Trump loses, conservatives return to considering Putin a bad guy, not some strong leader who plays Obama like a fiddle.
You went along with this nonsense because you hate Obama @FindersKeepers (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1881).
This is a very odd thing to say. And to resort to playing the "hate Obama" card, shows you can't logically defend your position. This issue is about Hillary's emails -- remember? The sad fact is -- "Putin IS a strong leader who plays Obama like a fiddle." But, that has nothing to do with this issue.
The very SECOND conservatives return to Putin bashing, he will become angry that you're no longer towing the line and will release a mountain of crap on the RNC and perhaps your next presidential candidate.
Let him. If the info released is true -- then it's true and we should all welcome it. You fail to recognize, Bo-4 that it was the current Administration that worsened our ties with Russia. And,you seem to support a new Cold War. This is bigger than your Hillary hero-worship -- this is about lives that will be lost.
You've given us your prediction -- now hear mine -- after the election is over, all of the talk of Russia hacking emails will slowly fade away because it's all fluff intended to sway the most gullible voters. There will be no more need for it after the election.
It makes you happy right now that he is meddling in our election because of the manner in which he is doing so. You'll be pointing fingers and sputtering when the tables are turned.
Your claim that it doesn't matter as long as it's the truth is shallow at best.
If the Russian government was hacking US email accounts -- why didn't they go after something interesting? Why Podesta? Think about that. Why not Huma? Why not Chelsea? Why not WJC? Come on -- this wasn't a high-government hack -- it was an inside leak of accounts that accessible from Podesta's account.
You wouldn't like it one bit if i hacked all your emails over the past several years and posted them here.
Stop pretending.
I might not like it -- but I was emailing others about you -- you would probably be interested.
This was most likely a domestic/inside leak based on the accounts accessed. Whomever leaked them (maybe Seth Rich?) sent them to Wikileaks and they are now releasing them. Russia would go after bigger targets. But, if it makes you feel better to accept the propaganda -- go right ahead.
End of story.
This is a very odd thing to say. And to resort to playing the "hate Obama" card, shows you can't logically defend your position. This issue is about Hillary's emails -- remember? The sad fact is -- "Putin IS a strong leader who plays Obama like a fiddle." But, that has nothing to do with this issue.
Let him. If the info released is true -- then it's true and we should all welcome it. You fail to recognize, @Bo-4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1297) that it was the current Administration that worsened our ties with Russia. And,you seem to support a new Cold War. This is bigger than your Hillary hero-worship -- this is about lives that will be lost.
You've given us your prediction -- now hear mine -- after the election is over, all of the talk of Russia hacking emails will slowly fade away because it's all fluff intended to sway the most gullible voters. There will be no more need for it after the election.
If the Russian government was hacking US email accounts -- why didn't they go after something interesting? Why Podesta? Think about that. Why not Huma? Why not Chelsea? Why not WJC? Come on -- this wasn't a high-government hack -- it was an inside leak of accounts that accessible from Podesta's account.
I might not like it -- but I was emailing others about you -- you would probably be interested.
This was most likely a domestic/inside leak based on the accounts accessed. Whomever leaked them (maybe Seth Rich?) sent them to Wikileaks and they are now releasing them. Russia would go after bigger targets. But, if it makes you feel better to accept the propaganda -- go right ahead.
End of story.
You're just lost in the dark @FindersKeepers (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1881) .. maybe one of your pals can help? Putin is a thug and a bully on an international level. Mitt Romney turned out to be correct - because of the former KGB kingpin and confirmed murderer, Russia is indeed our number one geopolitical foe.
You say you would welcome your favorite conservatives hacked. But you wouldn't. They've already been hacked actually - Poot is merely holding his fire for the time being.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russia-hack-u-s-politics-bigger-disclosed-includes-gop-n661866
Obviously you haven't been paying attention. I did not vote for Hillary - i criticize her daily, but do defend her against stupid stuff. So don't talk to me about "hero worship". That's what the right has been doing with Putin ever since the Kenyan, Marxist Muslim guy entered the White House. Yeah, i hear your prediction and raise you more Russian election meddling prior to the midterms and again in 2020.
We've only seen a tiny fraction of what they have.. there will be more in the coming 3 weeks. Lots more. Suggesting that a hack of the DNC is small potatoes is just willful ignorance. An inside job? Oh please .. the DNC hacked themselves, Bernie Sanders did it /// WHAT?
I could care less whether you email others about me, but hack my email and there'll be hell to pay.
SEVENTEEN intel agencies both civilian and military have ALL pegged it as HIGH PROBABILITY.
And the guys who've looked at the fingerprints are our best and brightest in this arena.
The 17 agencies are: Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Coast Guard Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, Energy Department, Homeland Security Department, State Department, Treasury Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marine Corps Intelligence, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National Security Agency, Navy Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/19/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-blames-russia-putin-wikileaks-rele/
Seth Rich -- You're going to blame it on a dead guy?
You're funny as hell ... FK-ing naive and misinformed but funny. ;-)
FindersKeepers
10-20-2016, 02:08 PM
Obviously you haven't been paying attention. I did not vote for Hillary - i criticize her daily, but do defend her against stupid stuff. So don't talk to me about "hero worship". That's what the right has been doing with Putin ever since the Kenyan, Marxist Muslim guy entered the White House. Yeah, i hear your prediction and raise you more Russian election meddling prior to the midterms and again in 2020.
But, that's what it is, Bo-4 it is hero worship. You're coming down in favor of the suppression of the truth just because you can't stand who is being targeted at present.
As far as your comment about whether the DNC hacked themselves -- well -- you're close, but not quite.
Here's a guy who worked for the NSA and he has some insight on how this kind of propaganda gets around and why.
Former NSA executive William Binney maintains that U.S. officials “know how many people could have done this but they aren’t telling us anything. All they're doing is promoting another cold war.”
Binney, who quit the NSA in 2001 rather than participate in the agency’s domestic data collection program, even compared allegations about Russian hacks to previous U.S. fabrications of intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the bombing of North Vietnam in 1964.
“This is a big mistake, another WMD or Tonkin Gulf affair that’s being created until they have absolute proof” of Russian complicity in the DNC hacks, he charged during a Newsweek interview.“
http://www.newsweek.com/russian-hacking-whodunnit-509505
So you see -- there are people in high places -- people who've been around awhile and know how the NSA works -- people who dispute the status quo government spiel.
I could care less whether you email others about me, but hack my email and there'll be hell to pay.
Sweets -- nothing about you or your email even vaguely interests me (or probably anyone else), so I highly doubt you're at risk of being hacked. However, if you hack my email -- good luck finding anything that isn't super boring.
SEVENTEEN intel agencies both civilian and military have ALL pegged it as HIGH PROBABILITY.
And, I've just given you an NSA expert who disagrees.
You're obviously not familiar with slippery wording. Here is the actual report:
The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe,[B] based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement
Certainly you can see the wiggle room they left themselves in that release.
Keep in mind that the report was released the same day the first of the Podesta files were released, so this wasn't talking about them -- this was addressing the DNC hack and Colin Powell that appeared on DCLeaks -- not Wikileaks.
Something tells me you don't have a clue as to who is leaking what about whom. LOL
But, that's what it is, @Bo-4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1297) it is hero worship. You're coming down in favor of the suppression of the truth just because you can't stand who is being targeted at present.
As far as your comment about whether the DNC hacked themselves -- well -- you're close, but not quite.
Here's a guy who worked for the NSA and he has some insight on how this kind of propaganda gets around and why.
http://www.newsweek.com/russian-hacking-whodunnit-509505
So you see -- there are people in high places -- people who've been around awhile and know how the NSA works -- people who dispute the status quo government spiel.
Sweets -- nothing about you or your email even vaguely interests me (or probably anyone else), so I highly doubt you're at risk of being hacked. However, if you hack my email -- good luck finding anything that isn't super boring.
And, I've just given you an NSA expert who disagrees.
You're obviously not familiar with slippery wording. Here is the actual report:
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement
Certainly you can see the wiggle room they left themselves in that release.
Keep in mind that the report was released the same day the first of the Podesta files were released, so this wasn't talking about them -- this was addressing the DNC hack and Colin Powell that appeared on DCLeaks -- not Wikileaks.
Something tells me you don't have a clue as to who is leaking what about whom. LOL
Still on a road of darkness we see.
LISTEN: I don't give a crap WHO is being targeted.
This is a foreign enemy targeting US - what next, our grid or worse - nuke codes?
We all should be very VERY concerned and as a Trumpkin (loser ;-) YOU are apparently not.
William Binney is a partisan clown quoted by ZeroHedge (you know, the dude who not only hates Obama, but has been banned from Wall Street for felony securities trading?)
Meh, prolly not.
ONE so called "expert" is interesting -- HUNDREDS (if not THOUSANDS) are far more-so.
Yep, my email is probably as boring as yours -- wanna swap?
Something tells me you've a clue about little other than conspiracy theories.
GO .. you amuse us @FindersKeepers (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1881)!!
The Xl
10-20-2016, 04:38 PM
The government can say anything and the public blindly eats it up. Sad.
russia just wants peace, everyone knows that.
that's why they're conducting naval exercises in the english channel- nothing says peace like migs over the orkneys.
How much longer will Pooty-Love endure?
Probably until 2019
FindersKeepers
10-20-2016, 05:40 PM
Still on a road of darkness we see.
LISTEN: I don't give a crap WHO is being targeted.
Oh stop already. Your protestations are more than a little unbelievable.
You were tickled pink when the Ferguson PD emails were hacked and released.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/42346-Ferguson-PD-emails-released?p=1031343&viewfull=1#post1031343
Methinks you doth protest way too much.
And all that fear-mongering. Aren't you afraid to go to sleep at night for fear Russia will be dropping nukes soon?:rollseyes:
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 05:42 PM
So when all 17 intelligence agencies public and private who examined the fingerprints say it's the Russians with "a high degree of confidence" there still is uncertainty?
I can say with a high degree of confidence that i won't be struck by lightening or win the lottery today.
So i guess there is uncertainty. :rolleyes:
Yea, just like WMD was a slam dunk. Remember? Or when the director of the NSA lied to Congress and said they weren't spying on us? Very credible.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 05:43 PM
russia just wants peace, everyone knows that.
that's why they're conducting naval exercises in the english channel- nothing says peace like migs over the orkneys.
Yea, let's just view their actions in a complete historical vacuum, that way they come out looking like the bad guys.
Ethereal
10-20-2016, 05:59 PM
Western countries - the USA, the UK, Germany - have invaded Russia how many times in the past century? At what point does it become entirely rational for Russians to want some kind of a buffer between them and these periodic invaders of their country? Wasn't it basically understood that NATO would not expand towards Russia's borders at the end of the Cold War? Yet that is precisely what happened. Is there anyone left in the world who does not know the CIA backed the illegal coup in Ukraine, which saw that country's democratically elected president removed from power and replaced with an illegitimate western puppet regime? And then there is the ultimate insult, the western-backed Salafi terrorists trying to overthrow Russia's Syrian ally. Again, at what point do people start to question the "Russian aggression" narrative emanating from the imperialist west?
Safety
10-20-2016, 06:29 PM
Oh stop already. Your protestations are more than a little unbelievable.
You were tickled pink when the Ferguson PD emails were hacked and released.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/42346-Ferguson-PD-emails-released?p=1031343&viewfull=1#post1031343
Methinks you doth protest way too much.
And all that fear-mongering. Aren't you afraid to go to sleep at night for fear Russia will be dropping nukes soon?:rollseyes:
Um...they were not hacked, they were released by the city. Call me skeptical, but I find it hard to believe that if this happened to another entity opposite of democrats or liberals, it would not be called an act of war.
Um...they were not hacked, they were released by the city. Call me skeptical, but I find it hard to believe that if this happened to another entity opposite of democrats or liberals, it would not be called an act of war.
oops
fascinating, to coin a phrase
:biglaugh:
FindersKeepers
10-21-2016, 04:29 AM
Um...they were not hacked, they were released by the city. Call me skeptical, but I find it hard to believe that if this happened to another entity opposite of democrats or liberals, it would not be called an act of war.
My bad -- I was thinking of the emails that were hacked by Anonymous -- I think those were KKK emails. But, Bo-4 was just talking about emails in general, so the released PD emails would be along the same line.
Bottom line -- privacy is over. You can't even be sure your phone calls aren't being recorded. I record business phone calls -- but I always tell the person on the other line that I'm going to record the conversation. It's a free app from Play Store. I don't have to inform them -- Kansas is a "one-party consent" state, so as long as I (the one party) consent to being recorded... all is well. But, I do it because it's the right thing to do.
There is a fine line (in my opinion) between the private emails of a person -- and the emails of a person employed by the taxpayers. The citizens own the latter, and just as a company has the right to check emails that originate with the company -- so does the public deserve to know the contents of business emails of those they employ. Except, of course, for classified emails -- but, even then -- someone, somewhere, has the authority to monitor those.
No person on the web should fool themselves that their gmail account isn't being monitored by algorithms designed to "hit" on certain "key" words. Facebook? Same thing -- and they'll shut down your account at the drop of a hat. And that's just the tip of the iceberg -- you're being monitored 24/7. Even Windows 10 has a feature that can record what's happening in your room if you have a microphone hooked up and turned on.
Like I tell my kids -- if you don't want others to know about it -- don't write it down...not digitally at any rate. Once you do -- it's out there.
Those, like Bo, who think they hold claim to some type of digital privacy need to remember why Snowden is living in asylum in Russia.
Safety
10-21-2016, 06:24 AM
My bad -- I was thinking of the emails that were hacked by Anonymous -- I think those were KKK emails. But, Bo-4 was just talking about emails in general, so the released PD emails would be along the same line.
Bottom line -- privacy is over. You can't even be sure your phone calls aren't being recorded. I record business phone calls -- but I always tell the person on the other line that I'm going to record the conversation. It's a free app from Play Store. I don't have to inform them -- Kansas is a "one-party consent" state, so as long as I (the one party) consent to being recorded... all is well. But, I do it because it's the right thing to do.
There is a fine line (in my opinion) between the private emails of a person -- and the emails of a person employed by the taxpayers. The citizens own the latter, and just as a company has the right to check emails that originate with the company -- so does the public deserve to know the contents of business emails of those they employ. Except, of course, for classified emails -- but, even then -- someone, somewhere, has the authority to monitor those.
No person on the web should fool themselves that their gmail account isn't being monitored by algorithms designed to "hit" on certain "key" words. Facebook? Same thing -- and they'll shut down your account at the drop of a hat. And that's just the tip of the iceberg -- you're being monitored 24/7. Even Windows 10 has a feature that can record what's happening in your room if you have a microphone hooked up and turned on.
Like I tell my kids -- if you don't want others to know about it -- don't write it down...not digitally at any rate. Once you do -- it's out there.
Those, like Bo, who think they hold claim to some type of digital privacy need to remember why Snowden is living in asylum in Russia.
I lived by those rules even before Snowden. I guess I just saw the writing on the wall in regards to allowing electronic devices access to your whereabouts and information 24/7.
FindersKeepers
10-21-2016, 07:43 AM
I lived by those rules even before Snowden. I guess I just saw the writing on the wall in regards to allowing electronic devices access to your whereabouts and information 24/7.
Same here.
I went round and round with our youngest when she was in elementary school. She kept writing notes and getting in trouble for it. She couldn't seem to grasp the concept that if it was in her handwriting -- the teacher was going to bust her. I bet I told her two dozen times to just relate the info verbally to her friends rather than writing and passing notes. To top it off -- she'd write mean things about other kids, like "I'm not going to invite Natalie to my party," or "Isn't Rachel's hair messy?" Things like that and, sure 'nuff, someone would get the note and tell the teacher. We finally worked out a compromise and she promised that if she simply couldn't resist passing a note -- that note would only contain kind sentiments.
Now, she tells me that she can't understand why her boyfriend's young son sometimes says hurtful things to other kids. I just roll my eyes.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.